Tiny red and gray chips found in the dust from the collapse of the World Trade Center contain highly explosive materials — proof, according to a former BYU professor, that 9/11 is still a sinister mystery.

Physicist Steven E. Jones, who retired from Brigham Young University in 2006 after the school recoiled from the controversy surrounding his 9/11 theories, is one of nine authors on a paper published last week in the online, peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal. Also listed as authors are BYU physics professor Jeffrey Farrer and a professor of nanochemistry at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark.

For several years, Jones has theorized that pre-positioned explosives, not fires from jet fuel, caused the rapid, symmetrical collapse of the two World Trade Center buildings, plus the collapse of a third building, WTC-7.

The newest research, according to the journal authors, shows that dust from the collapsing towers contained a "nano-thermite" material that is highly explosive. Although the article draws no conclusions about the source and purpose of the explosives, Jones has previously supported a theory that the collapse of the WTC towers was part of a government conspiracy to ignore warnings about the 9/11 terrorists so that the attack would propel America to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

The next step, Jones said in a phone interview on Monday, is for someone to investigate "who made the stuff and why it was there."

A layer of dust lay over parts of Manhattan immediately following the collapse of the towers, and it was samples of this dust that Jones and fellow researchers requested in a 2006 paper, hoping to determine "the whole truth of the events of that day." They eventually tested four samples they received from New Yorkers.

One sample was from a man who had swept up a handful of dust on the Brooklyn Bridge, where he was walking when the second tower fell. As the journal authors note, "It was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steel-cutting or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began later. Furthermore, it is not mixed with dust from WTC-7, which fell hours later."

Another man collected dust in his apartment, about five blocks from the World Trade Center, on the morning of Sept. 12. There was a layer about an inch thick on a stack of folded laundry near an open window.

Red/gray chips, averaging in size between .2 and 3 mm, were found in all four dust samples. The chips were then analyzed using scanning electron microscopy and other high-tech tools.

The red layer of the chips, according to the researchers, contains a "highly energetic" form of thermite. While normal thermite (a mixture of finely granulated aluminum and an oxide of metal) can be incendiary, "super thermite" is explosive. He says there is no benign explanation for the thermite in the WTC dust.

Jones made headlines in 2005 when he argued that the rapid and symmetrical fall of the World Trade Center looked like the result of pre-positioned explosives. He argued that fires alone wouldn't have been hot enough to crumble the buildings; and that even if struck by planes, the towers should have been strong enough to support the weight of the tops as they crumbled — unless they were leveled by explosives.

Essentially forced to retire, Jones says he is now paying for research out of his own pocket. He likens himself to Galileo and Newton, who stood by their consciences. "I would like to think I could stand up for the truth," he says.

The dust study vindicates his earlier theories, Jones says, but he has mixed feelings about the implications. "As a young student said to me a while back: 'It's exciting from a scientific point of view, because things are now making sense. But I feel sad for my country.' "

Thanks so much for having the courage to post the story about highly explosive residue being found in the 9/11 dust. I'm sure you're getting a certain amount of hate mail in addition to all the praise. I have some words of wisdom for you about the angry naysayers:

After reading the comments, it seems that one or two of them said that the article "didn't present an opposing view." Meaning, perhaps, a scientist who goes on camera and says "I hold a Ph.D. from so and so prestigious institution and I can declare that this is junk science", or something to that general effect. However, in this case, speaking purely scientifically and not politically, there is no "opposing view." The fact of the matter is, this study scientifically shows that energetic thermitic material was found in the rubble. The kind of "opposing view" that these people were hoping for would essentially be the equivalent of "I'm Dr. Smith, I disagree with Dr. Williams; I say 2 + 2 = 5 and my Ph.D trumps his Ph.D!" Because that's what we're talking about here.

Once again, thanks and I hope you continue such brave reporting in the future. This is what the media at the national level still lacks today.

There have been three questions raised by some concerning the new paper that I (and I am sure others) would like to be able to answer but can't without more detail.

1. The paper talks about separating the red/gray chips from the dust with a magnet. The question being asked is: How is this possible since the chips are aluminum and iron oxide which aren't magnetic?

2. Some are saying the only paint solubility test that would be legitimate would be the type of paint used on the steel in the WTC buildings. Are the types of steel paints/primers used in those buildings even public knowledge or publicly available information?

3. If the red/gray chips ignited at 430 degrees C how does that compare with what was previously understood by many as thermite having an ignition point temperature much higher than fires could reach?

"It's quite difficult to get much information on the WTC primer paint but it is mentioned in Appendix D of NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, pages 433 - 438. Here you find a Table D-1 which gives the chemical composition of the primer. The main inorganic constituents are iron oxide, "zinc yellow", "Tnemec pigment of proprietary composition" and diatomaceous silica.

Now the Tnemec pigment caught my eye, but the fact that it's described as having a "proprietary composition" suggests that this material's chemical ingredients are "top secret". However, in the modern world of "right-to-know" legislation, you can determine the composition of just about any proprietary material by looking up its associated MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet).

I have done this for Tnemec's Series 010 Red Primer and this is what I have found reported as the ingredients:

Now here lies the rub: Jone's red chips do not contain zinc, although some WTC iron-rich particles do indeed contain significant amounts of zinc. Nevertheless, zinc is essentially absent from Jones' red chips, thus it looks like these mystery particles are definitely not paint chips."

Dr. Frank Greening was the one asking about the use of a magnet to separate the chips saying that iron oxide and aluminum are non-magnetic. I wanted to add, but the edit time ran out, that I always thought iron oxide could be magnetic. It is used in magnetic media such as disk drives etc.

Dr. Greening does note that there is a form of iron oxide that is magnetic but wonders if that one would have been used in the superthermite.

that a lodestone, the original material used in compasses, was not native iron, but an oxide or other compound. Wikipedia: "Lodestone or loadstone refers to naturally occurring pieces of intensely magnetic magnetite that were used for magnetizing compasses." Also: "Magnetite is a ferrimagnetic mineral with chemical formula Fe3O4...."

Point 3, we noted in the paper that nano-thermite ignites at lower temps than ordinary thermite -- see Fig. 29 and text associated. Note that a KNOWN super-thermite sample from Tillotson in Fig 29 ignites around 530 C.
Ordinary (micro-) thermite ignites above 900 C, as I believe we noted in the paper.

Point 2. See Tanabear's note below on the WTC paint -- I like this type of probing! New data, supporting our paper, from none other than Dr. Greening...
BTW, if we had paint used on the WTC, we would be happy to subject it to tests as described in our paper. If it exhibited "explosive" behavior, as shown in Fig 29, then we would have something very interesting to talk about!

Point 1: Gamma-Fe2O3 is attracted by a magnet; note that we feel that a detailed analysis of the ~100 nanometer iron oxide grains we discovered (Dr. Farrer saw them first) is very important. TEM analysis is proceeding, but is tedious and time-consuming. As I wrote Greening, the TEM analysis is underway. It will be published as soon as we can.

..............I apologize. Your effort made Deseret news paper? I don't read the newspaper, although i looked for the article on KSL on line. It wasn't there.
No matter. You still inspire me sir. You are a man of character. Thank you.
Sincerely AL

This is great news. The amount of evidence continues to grow in favor of a reason for a new investigation. This is a major smoking gun. Thanks for all your work Professor Jones and team. Hope to see you in San Diego soon. Richard Gage is coming to Encinitas and another San Diego North County venue for 4 presentations on June 13th and 14th. Maybe you can join him like you did last year at SDSU. Peace and blessing to your wife and family.

Although the article draws no conclusions about the source and purpose of the explosives, Jones has previously supported a theory that the collapse of the WTC towers was part of a government conspiracy to ignore warnings about the 9/11 terrorists so that the attack would propel America to wage war against Afghanistan and Iraq.

I'm guessing this was the result of the writer or editor trying to get the article down to a certain length, perhaps adding a bit of a LIHOP spin, as well.

Odd, yes. Presuming that such oddities are more likely the result of publishers and editors (or pressures coming from them) rather than the news writers themselves, my first thought is: If that sentence hadn't been inserted and the rest of the article left as is, why would they have any problem with that? Why would they go out of their way to include a sentence that includes the words 'government conspiracy'?

Okay, so they maybe they reasoned that they couldn't just pretend that Professor Jones has not previously attracted attention for his 9/11-related research, and this would have to be mentioned somehow, somewhere in the article. But it could also be that they consider it quite likely that readers will be stimulated by the article to start questioning the 9/11 official story all on their own; and in that case, better that the readership have their skepticism framed for them in advance, so that it might proceed along channels least threatening to the official account and the overarching ideology of perpetual war in the Middle East and central Asia that it is meant to sustain. Thus, they include a sentence that concedes that there are those--including capable scientists--who believe in a U.S.-government conspiracy in relation to 9/11; but that also sets strict limits on what is believed, or is even conceivable, for these and any future skeptics who may join them (including their own readers). And those limits boil down to this: There is, and can be, NO skepticism with respect to who the actual perpeptrators of the attacks were and/or what their relation was/is to the U.S. government.

Then again, they could have simply ignored the story altogether, as most of the news media doubtlessly will--and of course I'm glad they didn't.

Greening is right -- if you look at our Fig 7, you will observe the ABSENCE of zinc in four samples of red material with freshly-exposed surfaces.

Tanabear quotes Greening, and I find this very interesting probing:

"It's quite difficult to get much information on the WTC primer paint but it is mentioned in Appendix D of NIST NCSTAR 1-3C, pages 433 - 438. Here you find a Table D-1 which gives the chemical composition of the primer. The main inorganic constituents are iron oxide, "zinc yellow", "Tnemec pigment of proprietary composition" and diatomaceous silica.

Now the Tnemec pigment caught my eye, but the fact that it's described as having a "proprietary composition" suggests that this material's chemical ingredients are "top secret". However, in the modern world of "right-to-know" legislation, you can determine the composition of just about any proprietary material by looking up its associated MSDS (Material Safety Data Sheet).

I have done this for Tnemec's Series 010 Red Primer and this is what I have found reported as the ingredients:

Now here lies the rub: Jone's red chips do not contain zinc, although some WTC iron-rich particles do indeed contain significant amounts of zinc. Nevertheless, zinc is essentially absent from Jones' red chips, thus it looks like these mystery particles are definitely not paint chips."

Let's re-emphasize Greening's conclusion:

"Nevertheless, zinc is essentially absent from Jones' red chips, thus it looks like these mystery particles are definitely not paint chips."

Thanks to those who have gone to the DesNews.com site and commented on the article. It has bumped up to position #1 this morning! Good work...